Cheap, renewable energy.

[Old Rocks]

Spend, baby, spend.

Considering we currently have thousands of square miles strip mined for coal and occupied by drilling rigs, thats not too much of a problem. The electrical infrastructure just needs to be upgraded to high voltage DC.

Thousands???

The grid is set up right now to operate on AC. You are talking about disassembling what we have and reconstructing the whole thing at a cost equal to the cost of building what we have from scratch except doing it with today's dollars.

Not even Edison sould make DC work. What do you know that he didn't?

Are you a Liberal? Debt is what you apparently live to build.

The really high capacity lines in the present grid are DC.

http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/elec_eng/world_bank_hvdc.pdf

Synopsis
Beginning with a brief historical perspective on the development of High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC)
transmission systems, this paper presents an overview of the status of HVDC systems in the world today. It
then reviews the underlying technology of HVDC systems, and discusses the HVDC systems from a
design, construction, operation and maintenance points of view. The paper then discusses the recent
developments in HVDC technologies. The paper also presents an economic and financial comparison of
HVDC system with those of an AC system; and provides a brief review of reference installations of HVDC
systems. The paper concludes with a brief set of guidelines for choosing HVDC systems in today’s
electricity system development.
In today electricity industry, in view of the liberalisation and increased effects to conserve the environment,
HVDC solutions have become more desirable for the following reasons:
· Environmental advantages
· Economical (cheapest solution)
· Asynchronous interconnections
· Power flow control
· Added benefits to the transmission (stability, power quality etc.)


Power transmission: Where the wind blows | The Economist

Where the wind blows
A grandiose plan to link Europe's electricity grids may recast wind power from its current role as a walk-on extra to being the star of the show
Jul 26th 2007 | from the print edition

PLUG in your toaster—or your television or your vacuum cleaner—and the electricity that surges through it is an alternating current. The question of whether the world would be powered by direct current (DC), in which electrons flow in one direction around a circuit, or by alternating current (AC), in which they jiggle back and forth, was decided in the 1880s. Thomas Edison backed DC. George Westinghouse backed AC. Westinghouse won.

The reason was that over the short distances spanned by early power grids, AC transmission suffers lower losses than DC. It thus became the industry standard. Some people, however, question that standard because over long distances high-voltage DC lines suffer lower losses than AC. Not only does that make them better in their own right, but employing them would allow electricity grids to be restructured in ways that would make wind power more attractive. That would reduce the need for new conventional (and polluting) power stations.

 

[Old Rocks]

Why arent conservatives worried that were going to bankrupt ourselves on fossil fuels?

Do they just think jesus is going to come back before that happens?

Very bullshit assertion! Conservatives are worried fossil fuels will bankrupt us and they want alternatives (not all, but most). HOWEVER, at the moment Green Energy (minus hydro) isn't ready to handle even 1% of the countries energy needs! Cap and trade will shink the economy and the electric car is FAR from perfected!

Not to mention we have coal and natural gas resources to last us centuries! Oil is the real issue!

In this decade, we will realize, the hard way, that the real issue is the change to our climate from the use of fossil fuels. Talk about a crash landing.

 

[Old Rocks]

Spend, baby, spend.

Considering we currently have thousands of square miles strip mined for coal and occupied by drilling rigs, thats not too much of a problem. The electrical infrastructure just needs to be upgraded to high voltage DC.

Thousands???

Still trying to go back to 19th century FAILED technology I see.

Yet another proof of the ludditism that is the green movement.

LOL.

Wind Powering America: U.S. Installed Wind Capacity and Wind Project Locations

40 gw of wind power, more coming on line every day.

Some very high efficiency thin film solar panels in the works, and hundreds of millions of roofs available for use.

 

[chikenwing]

The grid and large appliances in homes should remain AC. However, homes should have a DC busline at 24V or so for lighting, and most other power apps..

That way, each bulb (CFL or LED) doesn't need a switching power supply in it. And you can forget about labeling and searching for all those 100 wall wart adapters that run your life.

Ok, so instead of converting everything to DC, you're suggesting running a SECOND set of feeders out of a SECOND set of substations from a SECOND set of Transmission lines and generation facilities? WOW. You must have a ton of cash invested in the electrical transmission/distribution business that you're trying to up the return on investment of.

Look up at a Utility Pole (it's a Utility Pole, not a Telephone Pole in 99.9% of the cases). How much free space is up there on that pole right now? Probably not a whole lot in most areas. Now you want to run potentially up to three more sets of wires (larger than what's there now) along those poles? I don't think so.

No such thing proposed you colorful bird.. Doesn't even need to be on the utility side of the home. Could be a single AC/DC power panel installed INSIDE the house wiring. Do the conversion ONE TIME from the mains.. Then all those low voltage appliances plug into an interior (say 24VDC) DC buss that requires far lesower conditioning and safety concerns.

Well heres the kicker power in always equals power out. a watt will always be a watt at 24 vdc or 34500 vac this will never change.

 

[chikenwing]

Then all those low voltage appliances plug into an interior (say 24VDC) DC buss that requires far lesower conditioning and safety concerns.

explane your thoughts?? have you taken a good look at the heat sinks on a 12 vdc light fixture?? ever wonder why?? any voltage can be deadly,or burn your house down.

 

[whitehall]

Why arent conservatives worried that were going to bankrupt ourselves on fossil fuels?

Do they just think jesus is going to come back before that happens?

Conservatives are worried that monkey faces like you think they can force the private sector to invent a product that doesn't exist. There is no "cheap renewal energy" banana face.

 

[flacaltenn]

Hey ChickenWing/Sparky..

It's not all about watts.. I'm a circuit designer.. I giggle everytime I open up a lightbulb with a full 120VAC power supply in the base. It's heavy, it's costly, it generates EMI noise, ect.. Every time you use a wall wart to connect to 120 you are repeating the transient protection, fusing, UL cert, and large magnetics for transformers. With a household DC buss -- you can DC/DC convert in a square inch of PC board space with literally 6 components. It's a no brainer for LED/CFL lighting and electronics.

Those lighting heatsinks are there because they extend the lifetime of the bulb.. In the case of incandescent DC - this was largely to spread the heat. For the new LED bulbs, it's to keep the diodes cool and extend their life -- not yours.. Much harder to create to a health or safety hazard with 12 or 24VDC.

BTW: All that heat that incandescents generate is not ALWAYS wasted energy. In any home that has the HVAC heat on --- in fact NONE of the energy is wasted. So for about 5 months of the year, incandescents are PERFECTLY efficient. Just some more miscalculation that's been applied by the negawatt (conservation) proponents. Many northern cities that have changed their traffic lamps to LEDs have found this out because now they are considering placing heaters on their "efficient" LED traffic lights to keep the snowload off the lamps!!! People have already died due to the greening of traffic signals..

 

[flacaltenn]

Considering we currently have thousands of square miles strip mined for coal and occupied by drilling rigs, thats not too much of a problem. The electrical infrastructure just needs to be upgraded to high voltage DC.

Thousands???

Still trying to go back to 19th century FAILED technology I see.

Yet another proof of the ludditism that is the green movement.

LOL.

Wind Powering America: U.S. Installed Wind Capacity and Wind Project Locations

40 gw of wind power, more coming on line every day.

Some very high efficiency thin film solar panels in the works, and hundreds of millions of roofs available for use.

40GW sold -- 12GW ACTUALLY being produced on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Sunday only... The other days, well shit --- you better consult a REAL engineer.. THe details of how you integrate such a flaky, unreliable source as an ALTERNATIVE is left up to the user... Running 24GW for 20 minutes and NOTHING for the next hour is NOT "an alternative". It's a technical nightmare.

BTW: Roxie -- HVDC is NOT the current distribution backbone. It is used OCCASIONALLY for long-haul grid ties. But the economics of using it for local distribution really suck..

 

[flacaltenn]

Why arent conservatives worried that were going to bankrupt ourselves on fossil fuels?

Do they just think jesus is going to come back before that happens?

Actually cbirch -- I'm not a conservative, but I finally figured out the answer to your OP question.. So let me help out the conservatives here... Sometimes they're too shy to shout...

THey are not worried about "bankrupting r-selves on fossil fuels" because Obama is gonna bankrupt us PAYING OTHER COUNTRIES to drill for THEIR oil with OUR MONEY first!!!!

President Obama Finances Offshore Drilling in Brazil - WSJ.com

The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil's Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil's planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

The U.S. Export-Import Bank tells us it has issued a "preliminary commitment" letter to Petrobras in the amount of $2 billion and has discussed with Brazil the possibility of increasing that amount. Ex-Im Bank says it has not decided whether the money will come in the form of a direct loan or loan guarantees. Either way, this corporate foreign aid may strike some readers as odd, given that the U.S. Treasury seems desperate for cash and Petrobras is one of the largest corporations in the Americas.

But look on the bright side. If President Obama has embraced offshore drilling in Brazil, why not in the old U.S.A.? The land of the sorta free and the home of the heavily indebted has enormous offshore oil deposits, and last year ahead of the November elections, with gasoline at $4 a gallon, Congress let a ban on offshore drilling expire.

Takes all the fun out of bankrupting ourselves when we pay OTHER COUNTRIES to help..
THis turd of prez needs to go.. And if crap like THAT doesn't piss off all you leftists -- you ain't got a political soul...

He's SUBSIDIZING FOREIGN BIG OIL you dummies... And you just smile and defend your power base. I'm sure you're gonna vote for him aint'cha???

 

[code1211]

Hey ChickenWing/Sparky..

It's not all about watts.. I'm a circuit designer.. I giggle everytime I open up a lightbulb with a full 120VAC power supply in the base. It's heavy, it's costly, it generates EMI noise, ect.. Every time you use a wall wart to connect to 120 you are repeating the transient protection, fusing, UL cert, and large magnetics for transformers. With a household DC buss -- you can DC/DC convert in a square inch of PC board space with literally 6 components. It's a no brainer for LED/CFL lighting and electronics.

Those lighting heatsinks are there because they extend the lifetime of the bulb.. In the case of incandescent DC - this was largely to spread the heat. For the new LED bulbs, it's to keep the diodes cool and extend their life -- not yours.. Much harder to create to a health or safety hazard with 12 or 24VDC.

BTW: All that heat that incandescents generate is not ALWAYS wasted energy. In any home that has the HVAC heat on --- in fact NONE of the energy is wasted. So for about 5 months of the year, incandescents are PERFECTLY efficient. Just some more miscalculation that's been applied by the negawatt (conservation) proponents. Many northern cities that have changed their traffic lamps to LEDs have found this out because now they are considering placing heaters on their "efficient" LED traffic lights to keep the snowload off the lamps!!! People have already died due to the greening of traffic signals..

Very interesting take on this. I had never considered any of that.

 

[Old Rocks]

Iowa: Land of Corn and Wind Turbines : Greentech Media

Iowa ranks 30th among the 50 states in population and 23rd in square miles, but it is number two in wind -- and it wants more.

Iowa now has over 25,000 wind turbines and doubled its proportion of wind-generated electricity from 7% to 14% in 2009, the biggest jump in the U.S. Estimates put the current 2010 percentage of Iowa's electricity coming from wind above 17%.

Because Iowa added 879 megawatts of new capacity last year (enough to power more than 200,000 homes), the state's installed capacity is now second only to Texas. It has 3,670 megawatts of total installed capacity, enough electricity for 880,000 homes -- in a state with only 3 million people. And it has over 14,000 megawatts of wind power awaiting approval.

The state, known for its dairy farms and bucolic rolling cornfields, also became the leading provider of wind energy manufacturing jobs in 2009.

The numbers reflect the payoff for Iowa's transformation from farm country to wind country: 2,300 direct manufacturing jobs, an estimated 5,000-to-10,000 direct and indirect jobs associated with wind, $175 million in major manufacturing facilities' investments, 2009 annual property tax payments by wind project owners of $16.5 million, and 2009 annual lease payments to Iowa landowners of $11 million.

 

[Big Fitz]

Hey ChickenWing/Sparky..

It's not all about watts.. I'm a circuit designer.. I giggle everytime I open up a lightbulb with a full 120VAC power supply in the base. It's heavy, it's costly, it generates EMI noise, ect.. Every time you use a wall wart to connect to 120 you are repeating the transient protection, fusing, UL cert, and large magnetics for transformers. With a household DC buss -- you can DC/DC convert in a square inch of PC board space with literally 6 components. It's a no brainer for LED/CFL lighting and electronics.

Those lighting heatsinks are there because they extend the lifetime of the bulb.. In the case of incandescent DC - this was largely to spread the heat. For the new LED bulbs, it's to keep the diodes cool and extend their life -- not yours.. Much harder to create to a health or safety hazard with 12 or 24VDC.

BTW: All that heat that incandescents generate is not ALWAYS wasted energy. In any home that has the HVAC heat on --- in fact NONE of the energy is wasted. So for about 5 months of the year, incandescents are PERFECTLY efficient. Just some more miscalculation that's been applied by the negawatt (conservation) proponents. Many northern cities that have changed their traffic lamps to LEDs have found this out because now they are considering placing heaters on their "efficient" LED traffic lights to keep the snowload off the lamps!!! People have already died due to the greening of traffic signals..

Very interesting take on this. I had never considered any of that.

Yep. and LED tail lights tend to break from hard shocks when cold. So you can see this on big rigs and buses all the more. Plus they freeze over and don't melt off.

The incandescent bulb has gotten a raw deal for more than a few decades. LED's have their place, but so do incandescent... hell even CFLs do too... just not in the home really

 

[flacaltenn]

Iowa: Land of Corn and Wind Turbines : Greentech Media

Iowa ranks 30th among the 50 states in population and 23rd in square miles, but it is number two in wind -- and it wants more.

Iowa now has over 25,000 wind turbines and doubled its proportion of wind-generated electricity from 7% to 14% in 2009, the biggest jump in the U.S. Estimates put the current 2010 percentage of Iowa's electricity coming from wind above 17%.

Because Iowa added 879 megawatts of new capacity last year (enough to power more than 200,000 homes), the state's installed capacity is now second only to Texas. It has 3,670 megawatts of total installed capacity, enough electricity for 880,000 homes -- in a state with only 3 million people. And it has over 14,000 megawatts of wind power awaiting approval.

The state, known for its dairy farms and bucolic rolling cornfields, also became the leading provider of wind energy manufacturing jobs in 2009.

The numbers reflect the payoff for Iowa's transformation from farm country to wind country: 2,300 direct manufacturing jobs, an estimated 5,000-to-10,000 direct and indirect jobs associated with wind, $175 million in major manufacturing facilities' investments, 2009 annual property tax payments by wind project owners of $16.5 million, and 2009 annual lease payments to Iowa landowners of $11 million.

That's not counting KEEPING the jobs for the REAL baseline power generators that STILL need to be there to power ANY home "with wind". This is WAAAYY oversold.

I'm amazed that the same folks who complain about immoral advertising on the part of corporations can be this bold in their claims..

Because wind is FARRR more labor intensive -- that's a GOOD thing?

Because it occupies a bigger land footprint --- that's a GOOD thing?

Good for them.. Let them pay for TWO different power plants and PRETEND that they are powering even ONE HOME --- with 100% wind power. The only reason this story exists is because the FEDS have rigged the rules so that the grid MUST CARRY this unreliable, spiky hard to integrate source.. Out of the 30% of it's advertised power that it does sputter out ---- I'd be SHOCKED if more than 1/2 of that is actually used TO THE EXCLUSION of the backup generators being still sourcing the grid..

20 minutes on --- 2 hours off.. That's the nature of wind.... Go design a RELIABLE system to power 100,000 homes from that..

 

[Big Fitz]

Iowa: Land of Corn and Wind Turbines : Greentech Media

Iowa ranks 30th among the 50 states in population and 23rd in square miles, but it is number two in wind -- and it wants more.

Iowa now has over 25,000 wind turbines and doubled its proportion of wind-generated electricity from 7% to 14% in 2009, the biggest jump in the U.S. Estimates put the current 2010 percentage of Iowa's electricity coming from wind above 17%.

Because Iowa added 879 megawatts of new capacity last year (enough to power more than 200,000 homes), the state's installed capacity is now second only to Texas. It has 3,670 megawatts of total installed capacity, enough electricity for 880,000 homes -- in a state with only 3 million people. And it has over 14,000 megawatts of wind power awaiting approval.

The state, known for its dairy farms and bucolic rolling cornfields, also became the leading provider of wind energy manufacturing jobs in 2009.

The numbers reflect the payoff for Iowa's transformation from farm country to wind country: 2,300 direct manufacturing jobs, an estimated 5,000-to-10,000 direct and indirect jobs associated with wind, $175 million in major manufacturing facilities' investments, 2009 annual property tax payments by wind project owners of $16.5 million, and 2009 annual lease payments to Iowa landowners of $11 million.

That's not counting KEEPING the jobs for the REAL baseline power generators that STILL need to be there to power ANY home "with wind". This is WAAAYY oversold.

I'm amazed that the same folks who complain about immoral advertising on the part of corporations can be this bold in their claims..

Because wind is FARRR more labor intensive -- that's a GOOD thing?

Because it occupies a bigger land footprint --- that's a GOOD thing?

Good for them.. Let them pay for TWO different power plants and PRETEND that they are powering even ONE HOME --- with 100% wind power. The only reason this story exists is because the FEDS have rigged the rules so that the grid MUST CARRY this unreliable, spiky hard to integrate source.. Out of the 30% of it's advertised power that it does sputter out ---- I'd be SHOCKED if more than 1/2 of that is actually used TO THE EXCLUSION of the backup generators being still sourcing the grid..

20 minutes on --- 2 hours off.. That's the nature of wind.... Go design a RELIABLE system to power 100,000 homes from that..

Efficiency is NOT in the ecofascist lexicon. Unless you are referring to their desire to dispose of their detractors.

 

[AdvaPointSolar]

[/QUOTE]You just proved my point. Yes the prices are going to keep going up. That means good investment.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, you're right.

 

[LAfrique]

Why aren't conservatives worried that were going to bankrupt ourselves on fossil fuels?

Do they just think Jesus is going to come back before that happens?

Don't you mean Republicans not Conservatives? I may be Conservative but I am not a Republican. To answer your question though what do you mean bankrupt??? Why in the world would anyone be worried about going bankrupt on fossil fuel? It seems to be a good investment to me. It's supply is not increasing and it's demand is growing. It is a bit volatile with certain countries being able to manipulate it's price but really as a long term investment why not invest in the big oil production companies?

Thank you, Cimerian, for pointing out the fact that there exists a big difference between Conservatism and Republicanism. Main stream conservatives are very different from political conservatives: While conservatism simply seeks to conserve (and logical conservatives not merely out to conserve for sake of conserving), political conservatives are very warlike, disdainful of opinions of others and believe in the domination of people.

 

[waltky]

Two taxpayer-backed geothermal companies face deep financial difficulties...

Profits elude geothermal companies
5 Oct.`11 WASHINGTON – Two taxpayer-backed clean energy companies that specialize in capturing heat from the earth and turning it into electricity are facing deep financial difficulties, according to an analysis of financial records.

The companies, based in the West, have received $195 million in partial federal loan guarantees and grants aimed at promoting clean energy. Although the companies have agreements with utilities to buy their energy, they have not operated at a profit. They face questions similar to those of Solyndra, the now-bankrupt solar manufacturer that received a $535million federal loan in 2009. Raser Technologies, a Utah company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection this year after burning through hundreds of millions of investor financing and a $33 million Treasury Department grant that was awarded to the company in 2010. Nevada Geothermal Power (NGP) said in its financial filings that it has never operated profitably and that the company is at risk of failing as a going concern.

A third company, U.S. Geothermal, received a $97million Energy Department loan in February. Its filings with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission show that it has not made a profit in the past four years. Raser never produced more than 5 megawatts of power at its plant in Beaver County, Utah, Thermo No.1. In a lawsuit filed by Raser last month, the company claims the plant was never able to generate enough electricity, because of problems with generators for the plant developed by a subsidiary of Pratt & Whitney. P&W spokesman Matthew Bates said that "the equipment we provided has performed at or above promised levels." Officials with Raser and U.S. Geothermal did not respond to requests for comment.

NGP received a $98.5million loan guarantee under the same program that awarded Solyndra a loan guarantee. President Obama has come under withering attack from Republicans for backing the Solyndra loan. NGP, which also received an additional $66million in government grants, and Raser received support from both sides of the aisle. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, has cheered NGP, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has long backed Raser. NGP operates a geothermal plant called Blue Mountain that was forecast to produce about 45 megawatts, but has only reached 35 megawatts of power—not enough production to cover the company's loans and overhead. Department of Energy (DOE) spokesman Dan Leistikow said in a blog posting this week that Nevada Geothermal's debt won't affect its ability to repay its taxpayer-backed loan. The power plant cannot be used as collateral for any other debt, and it will be a source of revenue even if NGP defaults.

Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Reid, said the company is "experiencing some of the normal risk associated with … geothermal power." "We're like an oil company," said Paul Mitchell, who heads investor communications for Nevada Geothermal Power. "You have to drill. It's not unexpected that you can get these lag periods where our productivity and our monetary targets lag behind as we develop the resource." John McIlveen, a geothermal analyst at Jacob Securities Research, noted that whole industry has had a volatile year. Publicly traded geothermal stocks, including DOE loan guarantee winners Ormat Technologies and U.S. Geothermal — are down 60% to 80%. "Geothermal is not like wind, solar in terms of its risk in the long term," McIlveen said. "It's the only renewable that you can count on 24/7."

Source

 

[flacaltenn]

Two taxpayer-backed geothermal companies face deep financial difficulties...

Profits elude geothermal companies
5 Oct.`11 WASHINGTON – Two taxpayer-backed clean energy companies that specialize in capturing heat from the earth and turning it into electricity are facing deep financial difficulties, according to an analysis of financial records.

The companies, based in the West, have received $195 million in partial federal loan guarantees and grants aimed at promoting clean energy. Although the companies have agreements with utilities to buy their energy, they have not operated at a profit. They face questions similar to those of Solyndra, the now-bankrupt solar manufacturer that received a $535million federal loan in 2009. Raser Technologies, a Utah company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection this year after burning through hundreds of millions of investor financing and a $33 million Treasury Department grant that was awarded to the company in 2010. Nevada Geothermal Power (NGP) said in its financial filings that it has never operated profitably and that the company is at risk of failing as a going concern.

A third company, U.S. Geothermal, received a $97million Energy Department loan in February. Its filings with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission show that it has not made a profit in the past four years. Raser never produced more than 5 megawatts of power at its plant in Beaver County, Utah, Thermo No.1. In a lawsuit filed by Raser last month, the company claims the plant was never able to generate enough electricity, because of problems with generators for the plant developed by a subsidiary of Pratt & Whitney. P&W spokesman Matthew Bates said that "the equipment we provided has performed at or above promised levels." Officials with Raser and U.S. Geothermal did not respond to requests for comment.

NGP received a $98.5million loan guarantee under the same program that awarded Solyndra a loan guarantee. President Obama has come under withering attack from Republicans for backing the Solyndra loan. NGP, which also received an additional $66million in government grants, and Raser received support from both sides of the aisle. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, has cheered NGP, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has long backed Raser. NGP operates a geothermal plant called Blue Mountain that was forecast to produce about 45 megawatts, but has only reached 35 megawatts of power—not enough production to cover the company's loans and overhead. Department of Energy (DOE) spokesman Dan Leistikow said in a blog posting this week that Nevada Geothermal's debt won't affect its ability to repay its taxpayer-backed loan. The power plant cannot be used as collateral for any other debt, and it will be a source of revenue even if NGP defaults.

Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Reid, said the company is "experiencing some of the normal risk associated with … geothermal power." "We're like an oil company," said Paul Mitchell, who heads investor communications for Nevada Geothermal Power. "You have to drill. It's not unexpected that you can get these lag periods where our productivity and our monetary targets lag behind as we develop the resource." John McIlveen, a geothermal analyst at Jacob Securities Research, noted that whole industry has had a volatile year. Publicly traded geothermal stocks, including DOE loan guarantee winners Ormat Technologies and U.S. Geothermal — are down 60% to 80%. "Geothermal is not like wind, solar in terms of its risk in the long term," McIlveen said. "It's the only renewable that you can count on 24/7."

Source

Yeah Waltky -- I noticed that.. But I didn't know what their excuses were.. I'm bullish on geothermal in the right setting and without all the BS hype. Don't know how a facility designed for 45Mw can economically fail if it only produces 35Mw. That's way too thin a risk margin to make sense. Just BAD planning and execution... Go big -- or go home..

 

[LAfrique]

Why arent conservatives worried that were going to bankrupt ourselves on fossil fuels?

Do they just think Jesus is going to come back before that happens?

Political conservatives are not necessarily Christians or religious folks. Most political conservatives do not even have a sense of good moral or ethics: Most political conservatives are barbarians who do not care if you live or die.

 

[westwall]

Why arent conservatives worried that were going to bankrupt ourselves on fossil fuels?

Do they just think jesus is going to come back before that happens?

Conservatives want to produce our own oil reserves. Why won't the libs allow it? Why do the libs want to squander trillions of dollars on technology that is good at the small scale but notoriously fails on the large scale? Why do the libs want to pollute the air and water with this technology that in many cases causes more environmental harm then what it is aiming to replace?

Why do the libs rely only on emotion and refuse to actually do the real scientific work that is necessary to prevent debacles like the MTBE disaster the libs perpetrated on the citizens of California where MTBE was used to oxygenate the gasoline to reduce air pollution all the while ignoring the conservative scvientists who said repeatedly that MTBE was poisonous? Finally after polluting water wells all over the State the California ARB was forced to remove the MTBE, after causing countless billions in environmental damage.

Why are the libs so ignorant all the time?